I don't normally go to other forums other than the Civil Aviation forum, but as of today net neutrality is wiped from the books. This means ISP companies like AT&T, Charter, Comcast, Verizon, and etc will be able to screw around and block and control websites you are trying to go to. As well as throttle websites that could be a competitor of an ISP, and even set up pages where you have to pay extra to go to a page you want to go to, and of course that sucks......... Really bad. There is still hope it can be saved, however, it seems very bleak, scarce, and slim.

My main question I would like to ask is that as repeal worsens month by month, how will this effect the website as a whole and is it strong enough to keep itself alive? Thank you and have a wonderful weekend!

There are still bills making their way through both Houses of Congress, as well as multiple lawsuits by the attorneys general of several states fighting this. I wouldn’t say that net neutrality is totally dead yet.

This entire end of net neutrality panic is absolutely ridiculous. There will be absolutely no effects on sites like this. Not even a little. The worst that could happen is ISPs changing their fee structure so you have to pay extra for streaming site access. If you think they will censor specific sites you are absolutely out of your mind.

This entire end of net neutrality panic is absolutely ridiculous. There will be absolutely no effects on sites like this. Not even a little. The worst that could happen is ISPs changing their fee structure so you have to pay extra for streaming site access. If you think they will censor specific sites you are absolutely out of your mind.

I would agree that extrapolating to the worst case scenario is overkill. However, realize that is now legally allowed where it wasn't before. China freaked me out man, I couldn't even use google. The idea that it *could* happen is enough to make me uncomfortable.

... Also Ajit Pai is from the Obama era. This means it's safe for Trump supporters to be angry! Have at it!

It *could* never happen. People would be outraged and take the streets with torches and pitchforks and the guns that the same people who are most outraged about the end of net neutrality want to take away from the law abiding citizens of this country.

It *could* never happen. People would be outraged and take the streets with torches and pitchforks and the guns that the same people who are most outraged about the end of net neutrality want to take away from the law abiding citizens of this country.

This entire end of net neutrality panic is absolutely ridiculous. There will be absolutely no effects on sites like this. Not even a little. The worst that could happen is ISPs changing their fee structure so you have to pay extra for streaming site access. If you think they will censor specific sites you are absolutely out of your mind.

The fact that it's now possible for them to do it (even if they won't) is the issue.

A site like a.net is probably not on the radar for an ISP. But Netflix, Hulu, YouTube and other popular sites may be throttled down. Why would it be that if I'm paying to access data an ISP can go ahead and say "I'll charge you more for Netflix"?

It *could* never happen. People would be outraged and take the streets with torches and pitchforks and the guns that the same people who are most outraged about the end of net neutrality want to take away from the law abiding citizens of this country.

This entire end of net neutrality panic is absolutely ridiculous. There will be absolutely no effects on sites like this. Not even a little. The worst that could happen is ISPs changing their fee structure so you have to pay extra for streaming site access. If you think they will censor specific sites you are absolutely out of your mind.

the net neutrality panic is starting to look more and more like the Salem Witch Trials.

There are still bills making their way through both Houses of Congress, as well as multiple lawsuits by the attorneys general of several states fighting this. I wouldn’t say that net neutrality is totally dead yet.

Fingers crossed that something works.

Marc

Agreed. I believe there is still a chance in the lawsuits and the states as well, not to sure about Congress though, even though they are getting signatures to force a vote for the CRA, I don't even know if the House vote is gonna happen. I hope its sooner.

This entire end of net neutrality panic is absolutely ridiculous. There will be absolutely no effects on sites like this. Not even a little. The worst that could happen is ISPs changing their fee structure so you have to pay extra for streaming site access. If you think they will censor specific sites you are absolutely out of your mind.

The panic I agree has gone a bit too far. There are activist, states, and (Hopefully) the House of Representatives that are trying to stop this from happening. It of course won't happen right away because it could take long months even years to make changes. It's kind of like a manipulation trick, or even an optical illusion. You see an oasis in the desert about 3 miles ahead of you, and after walking all 3 miles it vanishes. Same goes for the internet, it seems normal at first, but after a while you will notice changes.

And hate to burst the bubble, but they can without the Title 2 laws, they can block, throttle, and patronize websites that you want to access is the main point. They want the internet to be like cable TV where you have to pay certain teirs so you can get on your favorite websites like Hulu, Facebook, IG, YouTube and etc. They can also do this to mobile phones IIRC. I really do hope they can stop this bill, because I wouldn't call it apocalyptic, but hard, annoying, and can ruin it.

Last edited by Narfish641 on Tue Jun 12, 2018 1:34 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Spoiler alert: there will be no impact whatsoever. The net neutrality advocates are fear mongering idiots.

I'm not one of those "fear mongering idiots", but I am just spreading on how everything could change within years. It might not happen as quick, but once you notice some changes then you'd realize stuff has changed. The way how we use the internet has changed mainly because of the technology, and that the majority old stuff we did back then are right near your fingers. One example is myself, I am a college student and majority of our work/test are online. And grade schools are also switching to online as well.Hopefully I explained this the best I can, not a politician, but just a person spreading the news. And also enjoys aviation.

I wish a.net was like it used to be. I paid for the first class membership and liked it. I would do the same again if I could.

FreequentFlier wrote:

Spoiler alert: there will be no impact whatsoever. The net neutrality advocates are fear mongering idiots.

Exactly! The internet will go on as before, just like in the days before 2012. Maybe it will get better and we'll see less useless conspiracy theories and fake/distorted "news" from unknown sources.

The reason why the rules came about is because of isps artificially throttling speed in the first place. To try saying things will be improved is strictly false. To say the internet will become unusable is also false. It means service will get shittier.

Eh you just need to look at what ISPs in countries without net neutrality law are doing to know what would happen. I am not talking about censorship or all that, but like bundling a stream service subscription into all ISP plans when the stream service have lower quality and quantity of available videos than those main sites and users cannot subscribe to unbundled plans, and then provide favorable bandwidth to those websites that the ISP cooperate and throttle others that do not cooperate, ISP insert advertisements onto third party webpages when they are serve to users, collection of internet browsing behavior and them sell them to marketing firm, banning of specific FTP or P2P connections and then ask for users to pay extra if they want to send files via FTP, installing some Zero campaign that allow users to use a special service for free in order to provide the service a competitive edge over other competitors, these all have happened to other ISPs outside the US.

I would say it's pretty damn well his right. You are using more data if you stream, so why do you expect not to pay more? You are rather spoiled by your flat rate it seems.

Thats already how the internet works! You get charged per Megabite. Streaming demands many Megabites, so you have to pay for more of them. It doesnt cost the internet provider any more to provide you with 1 mb of video than it does to provide 1 mb of anything else.

This has nothing to do with net neutrality. Flat rates arent mandatory for the internet providers either, they could stop offering those contracts tomorrow last year if they wanted.

Except the free market assumes there is some degree of competition.Consolidation among ISPs in the US means that millions of Americans already have no choice of internet provider. This in turn means that not only are they at the mercy of the one provider's fares when it comes to paying for their internet access, they will also likely lose the option of which streaming provider they can have, and thus, the content they get will get filtered based on financial agreements or political leanings.

The worst part of it, of course, is that this will become another political propaganda tool for corporations and their owners.

For the life of me, I don't understand why some Americans get all hot and bothered when it comes to defending major corporations, despite the fact that their effects on society is often questionable.You want to do the country a favor? Look after your SME's, not the billion dollar businesses who need no help in the first place.

I'll do my own airline. With Blackjack. And hookers. In fact, forget the airline.

Except the free market assumes there is some degree of competition.Consolidation among ISPs in the US means that millions of Americans already have no choice of internet provider. This in turn means that not only are they at the mercy of the one provider's fares when it comes to paying for their internet access, they will also likely lose the option of which streaming provider they can have, and thus, the content they get will get filtered based on financial agreements or political leanings.

The worst part of it, of course, is that this will become another political propaganda tool for corporations and their owners.

For the life of me, I don't understand why some Americans get all hot and bothered when it comes to defending major corporations, despite the fact that their effects on society is often questionable.You want to do the country a favor? Look after your SME's, not the billion dollar businesses who need no help in the first place.

You know what you are talking about. This isn't about a premium cost for premium service which is already in place, you want unlimited bandwidth and faster speed you pay a cost.

It was just announced that AT&T's merger with Time Warner has been approved.

Now if you have internet through AT&T and don't have a choice and you lean to the conservative or liberal end of the spectrum. Time Warner owns CNN and they can make the call to slowdown MSNBC's website or Fox's website along with all their streaming content as it serves their interest in getting people on the not throttled back CNN which will be fast. If you want that site you have to pay more or the ISP can simply not take any action to give you access to competing content.

Big Internet companies will be able to afford to pay off the ISP's to get the fast lane. Historically how the internet has been the juggernaut it has become to be is that a guy in his basement has the same access to everyone that Google and Facebook do and that is how both of those companies got started. Facebook started in a Harvard dorm for example.

Big companies like Microsoft and Yahoo do not support the repeal of Net Neutrality because the free and open internet is the reason that they are successful giants today.

To those who are saying nothing will change : then why repeal the rules in the first place ?

Because the way the regulations were implemented was idiotic. I'm neutral on net neutrality...although I think it's rather myopic to try and "freeze" something as dynamic as the internet how you in 2018 think it should always be, but arbitrarily reclassifying the internet as a utility (under a regulatory framework designed for the telegraph) was the wrong way to go about it. The FCC was basically saying "we now have the ability to regulate the internet like we do power companies...but we promise we'll only regulate you like a power company in such and such way. We'll only selectively only enforce these parts of the rule...scout's honor just trust us." That's an awful regulatory framework. That's my main bone of contention. And yes, the scaremongering is getting ridiculous.

I'm going in-depth a bit why net neutrality laws were formed and why taking those away is not a good thing since my thread starter was rushed and didn't have enough detail.

Back then before the net neutrality laws were implemented, ISP's like Comcast, AT&T, and others were accused of blocking websites/apps from consumers. Before the 2015 laws, there were multiple reports of the ISP companies blocking and throttling services that the consumers got through the ISP, and it's was over a span of a few years. One example was AT&T blocking FaceTime back in 2012 when consumers needed to pay an extra fee in order access the app, or even as far back in 2008 when Comcast blocked BitTorrent. The point is that it even if everything was normal, it's important to make sure the ISP didn't pull any oddballs out of their selves and pull a fast one. Everyone had to be treated fairly, without any blocking and throttling, given why the 2015 net neutrality laws were passed.

With the rules now taken away, it's possible for them to pull a bad move and decide to block, throttle, etc. The internet along with technology has changed, and we rely of the internet for a lot of things (Well technically not everything, but innovation has progressed!). From small businesses starting up companies, finding a job, entertainment, research, etc. Heck even for me as a college student majority of our work assignments are online lol! Point of fact, internet needs to be free and open for all consumers, and to treat all consumers fairly without any obstacles or any other issues.

I read that the demise of net neutrality calls for an era of private network popularization, with secure and high-quality service. This means carriers have the permission to favor some OTT platforms and throat the others. From the content provider's perspective, it is called paid prioritization. Personally I started using proxy a few months ago and don't have any regrets. It has the highest possible speed and now I have access to the blocked content. In the current situation I think it's the easiest way to bypass the restrictions and save money.

I read that the demise of net neutrality calls for an era of private network popularization, with secure and high-quality service. This means carriers have the permission to favor some OTT platforms and throat the others. From the content provider's perspective, it is called paid prioritization. Personally I started using proxy a few months ago and don't have any regrets. It has the highest possible speed and now I have access to the blocked content. In the current situation I think it's the easiest way to bypass the restrictions and save money.

The idea actually fit the Chinese concept of Internet Sovereignty rather well